In the recent debate by the Dem Presidental hopefuls, much todo was made about the Govenor's comments concerning homosexuals. Specifically as to lifestyle choice or birth related.

I can remember in the 60's when this debate became quite public that due to an extra Y or X chrom (not sure which), an individual was homosexual and the theory was that it was genetic and thus people were born homosexual or hetrosexual. (One theory surfaced that it was due to a chemical imbalance in the brain but this one didn't last long as I remember.) However there rose a "clatter" for this theory caused the idea that (if the theory were true) homosexuals were a freak of nature and this was unacceptable. Shortly thereafter, it became PC to say that it was a "lifestyle choice" and homosexuals were not a freak of nature. Now it appears that the ideas have come full cicrle so to speak. Having done so, and considering history, is it now going to be PC to state that people are born homosexual? If so, will the idea again surface concerning their being a freak of nature? By the by, the term freak of nature implys that since nature intended for the male and female of the species to reproduce thus insuring the survival of the species that any deviation from this was a "freak" of nature.

Truth is, I have no idea why some people are homosexual and can not firmly state that it is by birth or lifestyle choice................however, should Mr. Richardson not be entitled to his opinion without being demonized for it?